 |
APPIC Newsletter Online
Articles
Macrosystemic Issues
By Rick Weinberg, Ph.D.
weinberg@fmhi.usf.edu
On the Holiness of Knowledge, Empirically-Supported Treatment, and Clinical Training
Last weekend I was blessed to be invited by a Muslim friend to attend a gathering to commemorate and celebrate Milad-an-Nabi, the birthday of the Prophet Muhammed. This reverential and festive affair featured a speaker, Dr. Syed Akbar Hyder, from the University of Texas, Austin, who spoke to those assembled about the role of knowledge and intellect in Islam. Dr. Hyder told us how, in the Holy Koran, knowledge is deemed to be holy; in addition, purveyors of knowledge are holy, receivers of knowledge are holy, and the process of knowledge transmission is considered a holy transaction. He went on to talk about the various ways in which knowledge is transmitted. He showed us photos of beautiful paintings, stately architecture, elegant, decorative calligraphy, and stunning photography from the Arab world, and offered that knowledge comes from taking in and appreciating art such as this. As part of the celebration, an Islamic choir recited poetry and performed holy songs. Dr. Hyder offered that listening to, enjoying, and being moved by this music, poetry, and song is also the transmission of knowledge, and thereby holy as well.
As an educator, psychologist, and sometime scientist, I have certainly reflected from time to time on the value and importance of the educational process, but had never really considered that the passing of knowledge from teacher to learner could be considered holy. Likewise, I will discuss epistemology with students and colleagues, and what exactly constitutes sound, usable knowledge; but hadn’t really considered the process of beholding art, architecture, music, and other aesthetics as the transmission of knowledge, per se. Dr. Hyder’s comments made me reflect, “why not?”.
This notion stuck in my mind at the Muslim gathering because the celebration happened to occur on the weekend following a discussion on the APPIC Member listserve. This interchange pertained to why Internship Training Directors are or are not amenable to adopting empirically-supported treatments (EST), also known as evidence-based practices. Before hearing Dr. Hyder I really couldn’t put my finger on why I have been reluctant to embrace the notion that only ESTs should be utilized in psychotherapy and psychology training. But after hearing him articulate the diverse ways in which we can characterize knowledge, I think I am getting closer.
A wise friend and colleague, Dr. Steve Freedman, weighed in with me on this issue a while back. Regarding the question of whether we should restrict ourselves to EST, Steve suggested (and I am paraphrasing him here) that we may be using an inadequate metric to fully capture potential value. Perhaps therapeutic efficacy is in some cases more like art than science. To guage the value of a therapeutic approach perhaps we should look to the fields of art and music appreciation. The performance and visual arts can certainly affect the human condition profoundly, heightening one’s emotions, and lifting one’s spirit. In fact different types of music may speak deeply to one person, but have negligible impact on another. How can we know this? How do we measure this? Moreover, there are works by certain artists that are considered masterpieces, while others by the same artist are thought to be unremarkable. Again, how can we ascertain and what is the metric with which we measure masterpiece? Perhaps there is something technical and mathematical that is capturable in the patterns in which musical notes come together in a symphonic work to sound pleasant to the ear. Likewise perhaps angles, shapes and colors can be assessed against some formula to provide an established metric of beauty, but I doubt it. I suspect when all is said and done, what we would find most often is that the best assessment instrument is the eye and ear of the beholder.
It’s now about 3:00pm. Earlier today I ate lunch with an old friend and colleague whom I hadn’t seen in several years. Sadly she told me that her husband has pancreatic cancer, which as many readers may know, has been called the worst of all cancers, and is usually fatal in a matter of a three to six months even with the best of treatment. My friend and her husband are very religious people. They believe in intercessory prayer. According to my friend, there are many thousands of people praying for her husband. And so far so good. Through chemotherapy and intercessory prayer the tumor has stopped growing, the husband is out of the hospital, energetic, back to work, bouncing around with his two young sons, and planning his work schedule into the autumn. This is well against the odds. Has intercessory prayer worked alongside chemotherapy to help restore his health? While I understand empirical research with double-blind, random assignment methodology is underway to address the efficacy of prayer, and in some cases is showing promise (see the writings of Larry Dossey), I wonder how we can ever determine how unknown prayer by unknown people on behalf of a patient can possibly affect that person’s healing.
Which gets me back to the beauty of knowledge. Can psychology allow us psychologists room to be more Picasso- and Tchaikovsky- esque and still be loyal to our empirical, reductionist heritage? According to Dr. Hyder, not only would this be sound, it would also be holy. And if you ask my friend and her husband it can also be quite effective.
28 August 2004
| |
